The planting of Christianity in Russia. Prince Vladimir
Baptism was carried out in Muscovite Russia very cruelly, in several stages, and was the cause of the death of several million Russian people. Those. Christianization took the lives of more than half of the then population of Muscovite Russia ...
Baptism of Russia (Judeization). How it was
“Under paganism - the original Russian Faith - Russia flourished and developed rapidly, and satanic occultists wanted to immerse Russia in the information field of their religions ...”
Prince Vladimir "Red Sun" was not Russian, his mother was a Jewess Malka, the daughter of a rabbi, also named Malk, from the Russian city of Lyubich, which was a vassal of the Khazar Khaganate. This Jewess was the housekeeper of Princess Olga. She had a son Vladimir. The heir to the princely power was Yaropolk, the son of Svyatoslav and his legal wife. But Vladimir killed Yaropolk and usurped power in Russia. So the Jew became king and baptized Russia into a special form of export Jewish Christianity.
With forced baptism, the population of Russia was destroyed by one third !!! The idea of \u200b\u200bcreating monasteries for young Russians, so that they do not multiply, was also invented by him. Where did you see the monasteries of the Jews? They are not stupid like us. We abandoned the old Faith, the old national gods, adopted a foreign faith that preaches beggary and internal slavery, abandoned our calendar. Generally, Russian slavery began
Briefly, the picture was supposedly like this
Before Prince Vladimir, paganism reigned, and Russia flourished. Neighboring peoples persuaded Vladimir to convert to their faith, and many ambassadors came to him from the Kama Bulgarians, from German Catholics, from Jews and from Greeks, and everyone praised their faith. Vladimir first evaluated these faiths by the beauty of what he invented.
I consulted with the boyars. They told him: “Everyone praises his faith, but it’s better to send him to different lands to find out where faith is better.” Vladimir sent ten of the smartest boyars to the Bulgarians, Germans and Greeks. Among the Bulgarians they found poor churches, dull prayers, sad faces; the Germans have many rituals, but without beauty and grandeur. Finally they arrived in Tsargrad. The emperor found out about this and decided to show the Russians the service of the patriarch. “Many clergy served with the patriarch, the iconostasis shone in gold and silver, incense filled the church, singing poured into the soul.” External beauty and grandeur, luxury and wealth amazed and delighted the boyar commission, and when she returned to Kyiv, she said to Vladimir: “After sweet, a person does not want bitter, so we, seeing the Greek faith, do not want another.” "Well, that's why we choose Christianity," Vladimir said.
This is how the process of Christianization of Russia is presented. From all this official history, it follows that the very procedure for choosing a religion for Vladimir and his retinue was allegedly naive. And the main role in this choice was played not by the meaningfulness of religion (no one understood it), but by the external beauty of the rituals and the desire of the boyars for luxury and wealth. That is, according to the official version, the introduction of Christianity into Russia was the result of the stupidity of Vladimir and his entourage.
And how was it really? This whole official version, to put it mildly, is not very plausible ... Let's see who this Prince Vladimir is, where he came from.
First, Vladimir and his gang killed the pagan Magi. Then, the Jews invited by Vladimir from Tsargrad in priestly cassocks began a war with "filthy paganism", which these Jews called the bright Faith of our ancestors.
On wide stacks, in night fires
They burned the pagan "black book".
Everything that the Russian people from time immemorial
On birch bark he drew with a Glagolitic alphabet,
Chokh flew into the larynx of fires,
Autumn Tsargrad Trinity.
And burned in birch bark books
Marvelous diva, secret secrets,
Commanded dove verse
Herbs are wise, distant stars.
(Igor Kobzev)
In 996, Prince Vladimir destroys the detailed Chronicle of the Russian Empire and establishes a ban on Russian history before Christianization, that is closes the story. But, despite all the efforts, Vladimir and his gang failed to completely eliminate historical sources. There were too many of them, and they were very widespread.
They accepted someone else's faith, preaching begging and internal slavery, and abandoned their calendar. Generally, Russian slavery began, which continues to this day.
Vladimir was distinguished by truly Varangian cruelty, unbridledness, disregard for all human norms and promiscuity in the choice of means - qualities that were rare even for the mores of those times. Having been refused by the Polotsk princess Rogneda - she did not want to go for him, because Vladimir was a bastard, the illegitimate son of Svyatoslav from the Drevlyanian housekeeper slave Malusha - Vladimir goes to Polotsk by war, captures the city and rapes Rogneda in front of his father and mother.
As the chronicler notes, “He was insatiable in fornication, bringing married women to him and corrupting girls”. Having killed Yaropolk, he immediately takes his wife, that is, the wife of his brother. And she was already pregnant. A son was born from Yaropolk. And the attitude towards him in the family was appropriate. As in his time and to Vladimir himself. And he behaved, presumably, also accordingly ... In general, Svyatopolk grew up, the future killer of his own brothers Boris, Gleb and Svyatoslav, nicknamed the chronicler Svyatopolk the Accursed…
But one way or another, Prince Vladimir, so terrible in his unbridled passions, became a key figure in the history of Russia. Everything that was done after him is only a consequence of his (?) choice of faith. Prince Vladimir, eight years after the murder of Yaropolk, christened Russia and became Vladimir the Holy.
Chronicle evidence of the forced baptism of Russia
Laurentian Chronicle. See ancient text:
PSRL, v.1, v.1, M., 1962; repetition ed. PSRL, L "1926; or in the book" Literature of Ancient Russia 1X-KhP ev ". M., 1978. Translation by B. Kresen.
6488 (980). And Vladimir began to reign in Kyiv alone, and set up idols on a hill outside the courtyard of the tower: Perun of wood - a silver head, and a golden mustache, and Khors-Dazhbog, and Stribog, and Simargl, and Mokosh ... Vladimir planted Dobrynya, his uncle, in Novgorod. And, having come to Novgorod, Dobrynya set an idol over the Volkhov River, and the Novgorodians offered sacrifices to him as to a god ...
Vladimir was defeated by female lust, and these were his spouses: Rogneda, whom he planted on Lybid ... had four sons from her: Izeslav, Mstislav, Yaroslav, Vsevolod, and two daughters; from the Greek woman had - Svyatopolk; from Chekhin - Vysheslav; from the other - Svyatoslav and Mstislav; and from the Bulgarian - Boris and Gleb, and he had 300 concubines - in Vyshgorod, 300 - in Belgorod and 200 in Berestov ... And he was insatiable in fornication, he brought married wives to himself and corrupted girls. He was the same womanizer as Solomon, for they say that Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines. He was wise, but in the end he died. This one was ignorant, but in the end he found salvation.
In the year 6496 (988), Vladimir went with an army to Korsun, the Greek city ... And he sent to the kings Vasily and Constantine, and so he conveyed to them: “Here he took your glorious city; heard that you have a virgin sister; if you do not give it for me, then I will create for your city (capital) the same as I created for this city. And when they heard this, they (Vasily and Konstantin) were sad, and sent him a message, and answered like this: “It is not proper for Christians to give wives to infidels. If you are baptized, then you will receive it, and you will receive the kingdom of heaven, and you will be of the same faith with us.
... By God's providence, at that time, Vladimir's eyes ached, and did not see anything, and grieved greatly, and did not know what to do. And the queen (Anna) sent to him and conveyed: “If you want to get rid of this disease, then be baptized sooner; otherwise you will not get rid of this disease. Having heard, Vladimir said: “If this is truly fulfilled, then the Christian God will be truly great.” And he ordered to be baptized. The bishop of Korsun with the tsarina's priests, having announced, baptized Vladimir. And when he laid his hand on him, immediately he received his sight. Vladimir, feeling his sudden healing, glorified God: "Now I have seen the true God."
After that, Vladimir took the queen and priests of Korsun with the relics of St. Clement ... took both church vessels and icons for his blessing ... He took both two copper idols and four copper horses, which still stand behind the church of St. Mother of God. Korsun gave the Greeks as a vein for the queen, and he himself came to Kyiv. And when he came, he ordered the idols to be overthrown - some to chop, and others - to put on fire. Perun also ordered to tie a horse to the tail and drag him from the mountain along the Borichev vozvoz to the Brook, and ordered twelve men to beat him with rods. This was done not because the tree feels, but to desecrate the demon ... Yesterday I was honored by people, and today we will desecrate.
When they dragged Perun along the Creek to the Dnieper, the unfaithful people mourned him ... And, having dragged him, they threw him into the Dnieper. And Vladimir said to those accompanying him: “If he landed somewhere, you push him away from the shore until he passes the rapids, then just leave him.” They did just as he ordered. As soon as they left him outside the rapids, the wind brought him aground, which was later called Perunya Mel, as it is called to this day. Then Vladimir sent throughout the city to say: "If someone on the river does not turn tomorrow - whether it be rich, or poor, or a beggar, or a slave, it will be disgusting to me."
Masurian chronicler. PSRL. v. 34, M., 1968. Translation by B. Kresen.
6498 (992). Dobrynya, Uncle Vladimir, went to Veliky Novgorod, and crushed all the idols, and ruined the trebbling grounds, and baptized many people, and erected churches, and placed priests in the cities and villages of the Novgorod border. The idol of Perun was flogged, and thrown to the ground, and, having tied the ropes, they dragged him along the feces, beating him with rods and trampling. And at that time a demon entered that soulless idol of Perun and cried out in him like a man: “Oh woe to me! Oh me! I have fallen into unmerciful hands." And people threw him into the Volkhov River and commanded that no one take over him. He, sailing through the great bridge, hit the bridge with his club and said: “Here let the people of Novgorod amuse themselves, remembering me,” and here crazy people worked for many years, converged on certain holidays and staged performances, and fought.
Joachim Chronicle. Ancient text in the book. Tatishchev V.N. Russian History, 1 vol. M., 1963. Translation by B. Kresen.
6499(991). In Novgorod, people, seeing that Dobrynya was going to baptize them, made a veche and swore all of them not to let them into the city and not to let them refute the idols. And when he arrived, they, having swept away the great bridge, went out with weapons, and no matter what threats or affectionate words Dobrynya exhorted them, they did not want to hear, and they brought out two large crossbows with many stones, and put them on the bridge, as on their real enemies. The highest above the Slavic priests, Bogomil, who, because of his eloquence, was named the Nightingale, forbade people to submit.
We stood on the trading side, walked through the markets and streets, and taught people as best we could. But to those perishing in wickedness, the word of the cross, which the apostle spoke, appeared to be foolishness and deceit. And so we stayed for two days and baptized several hundred people.
The skinny thousand Novgorodian Ugony, went everywhere and shouted: “It is better for us to die than to give our gods to reproach.” The people of this country, having become angry, ruined the house of Dobrynya, plundered the estate, beat his wife and relatives. Thousand Vladimirov Putyata, a smart and brave husband, having prepared a boat and choosing 500 people from Rostov, crossed over the city to the other side at night and entered the city, and no one was careful, because everyone who saw them thought they saw their soldiers. He, having reached the court of Stealing, immediately sent him and other first husbands to Dobrynya across the river. The people of that country, having heard about this, gathered up to 5000, surrounded Putyata, and there was an evil slaughter between them. Some went and the Church of the Transfiguration of the Lord was swept away and the houses of Christians began to be robbed. And at dawn, Dobrynya arrived in time with the soldiers who were with him, and he ordered some houses to be set on fire near the shore, which people were very frightened of, and they ran to put out the fire; and immediately they stopped whipping, and then the first men, having come to Dobrynya, began to ask for peace.
Dobrynya, having gathered soldiers, forbade robbery, and immediately crushed the idols, burned the wooden ones, and broke the stone ones and threw them into the river; and there was great sorrow for the wicked. Men and women, seeing this, with a great cry and tears, asked for them, as if for real gods. Dobrynya, mocking, told them: “What, crazy, you regret those who cannot defend themselves, what good can you expect from them.” And he sent everywhere, announcing that everyone should go to baptism ... And many came, and the soldiers who did not want to be baptized were dragged and baptized, men above the bridge, and women below the bridge ... And so baptizing, Putyata went to Kyiv. That is why people vilify the Novgorodians, saying that Putyata baptized them with a sword, and Dobrynya with fire.
Laurentian Chronicle. Translation by B. Kresen.
6532 (1024). In the same year, the Magi rebelled in Suzdal, they beat the old child at the devil's instigation and demons, saying that they were hiding supplies. There was a great rebellion and famine throughout the country ... Yaroslav, having heard about the Magi, came to Suzdal; having captured the Magi, he expelled some, and executed others, saying this: “God sends famine, or pestilence, or drought, or another execution on every country for sins, but a person does not know for what.”
6779 (1071). ...At the same time, a sorcerer came, seduced by a demon; having come to Kyiv, he said and then told people that in the fifth year the Dnieper would flow back and that the lands would begin to change places, that the Greek land would take the place of the Russian, and the Russian would take the place of the Greek, and other lands would change. The ignorant listened to him, but the faithful laughed, saying to him: "The demon is playing with you to your destruction." Which happened to him: one of the nights he went missing.
Since we've talked about struggle and synthesis, let's recap. There was a struggle "against" the adoption of Christianity, and there was a struggle for it. In this struggle, Christianity was a strong point, because the ruling elite, the trading elite, and the squad became Christians. The strength of Christianity also lay in the fact that there are no people more zealous in faith than new converts. In the end, the strong side that represented Christianity won out, even if it took a long time. The push was given, and then everything rolled like a snowball that rolls down the mountain, picking up speed and collecting all the snow and everything on it. So Christianity swept through paganism, gathering in a huge ball of Russian Orthodoxy.
Neo-paganism about Christianity in Russia.
In a conversation about how Christianity was born and then accepted in Russia, it is impossible to avoid some topics. Scientists ignore these topics, because it makes no sense to discuss someone's fiction. But neo-paganism, nevertheless, puts forward many sharp theses regarding the adoption of Orthodoxy in Russia, makes many statements. Answering them, the history of the adoption of Christianity in Russia can be covered additionally.
Neopaganism is very different. Lots of very different trends. Some, patiently studying various historical sources, are trying to reconstruct bit by bit some moments of Slavic paganism, others shout that they are Slavs, that paganism is the faith of their fathers and grandfathers, and the Kolovrat on a T-shirt is the original symbol of Slavic paganism. Controversy with the Christians of these latter usually consists in slandering and insulting the Christian faith and the Russian people. Such techniques often demonstrate complete ignorance of the history of Russia - Russia and the Russian people. Within the framework of this article, I consider it necessary to discuss one of the frequently raised topics, especially since this will help to further highlight the issue of the adoption of Christianity in Russia. This topic is about the forced baptism of Russia, a myth about powerful religious resistance to attempts to spread Christianity, in fact, about a religious war in Russia at that time. Let's try to figure out what is true and what is fiction.
The planting of Christianity in Russia with great bloodshed. Truth and fiction.
The forcible planting of Christianity in Russia is a very big and serious issue, directly related to the topic of this article. It would be ridiculous to think that as soon as Vladimir the Red Sun announced that Russia was accepting Christianity, people subject to him clapped their hands and ran to be baptized. This was not and could not be. By persuasion, promises, coaxing, but more often simply by the threat of the use of military force and even by use, Orthodoxy was introduced into Russia. Yes, often it was done by force. This is no secret to anyone. There are many tribes, principalities and cities, each with its own temper, go and explain to everyone that "Christianity is great."
Vladimir Svyatoslavovich, in order to strengthen his power, sent his 12 sons to the most important cities of Russia. Local princes were removed. The sons of Vladimir began to strengthen the central government (who would have thought that this was how the foundations of feudal fragmentation were laid). An important part of which was the baptism of local tribes.
But let's think about this. After all, in those days everything was done by force. These were the rules of life. How many first princes of Kievan Rus did military campaigns against neighboring (mostly Slavic) tribes before they were tormented? How much blood was shed while Kievan Rus was being created. The tribes did not joyfully flee to the Old Russian state, bearing tribute. No. They fiercely resisted. And just about anything, they rebelled, broke away, and they again had to be conquered. The whole history of the creation of Russia consists of military campaigns against neighboring tribes.
Who is now mourning the murdered Drevlyans whom Olga, then still a pagan, cruelly avenged for the death of her husband Igor and for the attempted separatism. Cruel, but quite in the spirit of that pagan time. They misbehaved and paid the price.
What about big blood? Here we can say that in comparison with other countries, the adoption of Orthodoxy in Russia took place quite peacefully. After all, everything is known in comparison. What rivers of blood flowed during the Christianization of Bulgaria, Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic. There is no comparison with Russia. It makes no sense to talk about some kind of bloody history of the adoption of Christianity.
Here you can tell one interesting historical fact about Olaf Tryggvason. We are interested in it for many reasons, which I will now discuss. He was born in 963. He lived in Russia from the age of 9 (there is a version that it was Vladimir Svyatoslavovich who bought him out of slavery), first in Novgorod, then in Kyiv. He served in the squad of Prince Vladimir "Red Sun" Svyatoslavovich, the future baptist of Russia. Lived in Russia for 9 years. And the most interesting thing is that, having become the king of Norway, Olav, who had already been baptized, began to actively spread Christianity. Officially, it is he who is considered the baptizer of Norway. What an interesting and surprising coincidence! He served under the baptist of Russia and himself became the baptist of Norway. True, it should be noted that, in contrast to Vladimir Svyatoslavovich, Olav really often baptized with fire and sword, planting Christianity in the most cruel way. He died from his efforts. He was betrayed and killed by opponents of Christianity.
Now about the resistance and uprisings, which, according to some versions, were of a religious nature. The nature of resistance to the planting of Christianity.
The brightest event is, of course, the baptism of Novgorod. When "Putyata was baptized with a sword, and Dobrynya with fire." Most often, it is he who is cited as an example when they talk about the rivers of blood that Christians poured in Russia.
Novgorod was the second most important center of Kievan Rus. Vast territories were subject to Novgorod. It was the Novgorodians (Chuds, Slovenes, Krivichi and all lived on these lands) who invited Rurik to reign. Did Novgorod, feeling its strength, want to remain subject to Kyiv? I think no. This is what happened in later history. During the period of feudal fragmentation of Russia, Novgorod was independent. The Novgorod Republic existed from 1136 to 1478. It is usually said that the city was ruled by a veche, although in fact there was no real people's democracy in Novgorod. Everything was run by the elite - the merchant oligarchy, although popular opinion seriously influenced the decisions made.
In 980, Dobrynya, at the behest of Prince Vladimir the Red Sun, during the pagan reform, installs the idol of Perun in Novgorod. Novgorodians instead of Volos receive another main god.
In 990, a "little baptism" takes place in Novgorod. Voluntary baptism of a certain number of Novgorodians.
An important point. Some details of the "baptism of Novgorod" are given based on Joachim Chronicle and, and inserts made personally by Tatishchev, and, for this reason, are unreliable. As for example, information about the Nightingale and the Rostovites.
In 991, Dobrynya with an army came to baptize Novgorod forcibly. And it flashed. Why. I think there are several reasons. And the forceful attempt to overthrow the old gods is only one of the reasons, and even then not the main one. The researchers believe that the main reason is that the Novgorod authorities saw for themselves in the popular unrest an opportunity to gain independence from Kyiv. Who wants to read about it in detail, I send it to the "materials". In a nutshell, this is the story. Novgorod is divided by the Volkhov River. On the one hand, Dobrynya with force, on the other, the rebellious Novgorodians, led by the sorcerer (in the source he is called a priest) Bogomil (for his oratorical abilities, nicknamed Nightingale) and the mayor Ugony. The bridge between the banks has been destroyed. On the other side where Dobrynya is, the priests go from house to house and persuade them to be baptized. The rebels are destroying the Christian church and the estate of Dobrynia.
Attempts to reach a peace agreement fail and Putyata conducts a "special operation". At night, with his 500 Rostovites (and let them not tell me that this detachment was entirely Christian), he crosses the river, captures the leaders of the rebels and transports them to Dobrynya. He himself fortifies himself in the estate of Ugonyaya and up to 5000 (it is difficult to say whether the figure is correct, just like those 500 Rostovites) rebels begin to act against him. They fight all night. Someone was cut down, of course, but the night siege could not end in a lot of blood.
In the morning, Dobrynya crosses in boats, sets fire to the city. The rebels do not have a leader, they submit to force and run to put out fires at home. All! The operation performed can cause admiration. With little blood, quickly, the issue was resolved. With Perun, they did the same as in Kyiv. Subjected to pagan execution and floated along the Volkhov. How many people were beaten is not reported. Judging by the speed and circumstances, not much. The city remained practically intact, and was not plundered. Novgorodians were baptized in Volkhov. Such is the story. By the way, quite unusual for its time. The cities that were taken were ravaged, robbed, people were taken away in full. So everything went off without a hitch. If you are interested, you can recall a much later time for comparison. The times of Ivan the Terrible and the campaign against Novgorod by his oprichny troops in 1569-70. That campaign ended for the freedom-loving Novgorodians very sadly, with great bloodshed.
|
|
Before I continue talking about the uprisings that are called "anti-Christian" and often associated with resistance to the planting of Christianity, I would like to say this - uprisings (riots) in Russia have occurred throughout its history. With the traditionally strong institutions of people's power - veche, it was constantly seething. After all, the veche was not only in Novgorod, but everywhere. They also rebelled under paganism, during the transitional period, and when Christianity became so strong that the word "Russian" became synonymous with the word "Orthodox." In the pagan times of the Old Russian state, tortured tribes constantly rebelled. The central government did not have time to go on campaigns. A well-known case when the Drevlyans rebelled, killing Prince Igor.
During the feudal fragmentation and then, during the time of the Tatar-Mongol yoke, there were also many riots, they were due to heavy taxes, dissatisfaction with the authorities and the struggle for independence, a reaction to oppression or unbearable living conditions. When people live well, why should they rebel?
There were times when the whole country was on fire for many decades. For example, in the 17th century. The Moscow uprising of 1606 against False Dmitry I, the uprising of Ivan Bolotnikov 1606 - 1607, the Salt riot of 1648, the Pskov uprising of 1650, the Novgorod uprising of 1650, the Copper riot of 1662, the uprising of Stepan Timofeevich Razin in 1667. The Bashkirs were constantly buzzing. A special place is occupied by the Schism after the reform of Patriarch Nikon, in 1666, that's when the real religious war took place. The tsarist troops then besieged the Solovetsky Monastery for 8 months. It's only about uprisings. And yet there was confusion. And False Dmitry II (Tushinsky thief) and the militia of Minin and Pozharsky and the siege of the Trinity Sergius Lavra. Many, many things.
So the events that took place in the 10th-11th centuries, in Novgorod, Rostov arouse our interest only because they can be attributed a religious character, and even then, only because the main “heroes” in them were the Magi. Interestingly, people in Russia were often troubled by people associated with religion. Once upon a time, the sorcerers did this, then they cut off all sorts of priests, blessed, Old Believers. For some reason people believed them. Recall Bloody Sunday and priest Gapon, it was already the twentieth century, and people still believed in the tsar as a sacred person for all of Russia.
Now let's talk only about those uprisings in which the Magi directly participated and which can, albeit conditionally, be attributed to religious uprisings. We only talk about them, because in the 11th century there were several uprisings, for example, in Kyiv in 1068, and the Magi had nothing to do with it.
1024, famine in the Suzdal land. Wolves are right here. They stir up the people - "God punishes for sin" (it's not very clear for what, maybe for Christianity?). The common people revolted. Magi beat the "eldest child" (and how can one not think about human sacrifices here?).
In the second half of XI, a sorcerer appears in Kyiv, who stirs up the people with all sorts of predictions about how bad everything will be. After some time, he disappears. The incident got into the annals, and we learn that at that time pagans lived in Kyiv as well. It is not clear how many there were. The pagans believed the sorcerer, the Christians laughed at them. Quite a peaceful existence.
In Rostov (oh, this Rostov, the outskirts of the Russian land, the Finno-Ugric tribes with their gloomy sorcery) the pagans kill Bishop Leonty for Christian preaching and zeal in the faith.
1071 year. About which supporters of the fierce struggle of the pagans with the advancing Christianity speak so much. The most important thing that we need to take into account is that the chroniclers point to a terrible famine at this time. It is interesting that in Soviet times, scientists defined these uprisings as urban (Novgorod) and peasant (in the Rostov land, now the Rostov region) as the struggle of the oppressed classes against feudalism (for example, M.N. Tikhomirov in the book “Peasant and urban uprisings in Russia XI- XIII century”), it is clear that there was a political background, but nevertheless, most of the truth is present in this version.
In the Rostov land (they often talk about the land of Suzdal) and the Belozer region in 1071, there was a terrible famine. The people are dissatisfied. Magi appear, who begin to "stir up" the people, and, judging by the annals, they are engaged in some kind of rituals of their own. The chronicle conveys everything according to the story of Jan Vyshatich, sent to collect tribute. " When once there was a shortage in the Rostov region,- we read in the annals, - Two Magi rose up from Yaroslavl, saying: "We know who holds the abundance." And they went along the Volga; where they came to the churchyard, they called the best wives there, saying: this one keeps the live, and this honey, and this fish, and this fur. And they brought their sisters, their mothers, and their wives to them. They, in delusion, cut behind their shoulders, took out any kind of live, any fish, and killed many women and took their property for themselves. And they came to Beloozero, and they had 300 other people ...." What happened next is a long and detailed story. For those who are interested, I suggest reading historical studies on this topic.
It all ended rather quickly, with the death of the Vokhvs, who were killed by the relatives of the ruined. Interestingly, from the conversation between Jan Vyshatich and the Magi, we learn their religious views. So, some scholars tell us that these Magi did not preach paganism at all, but Bogomilism. Interesting turn of events, isn't it?
Summing up this event, we can say that although a certain religious theme of unclear content was present in the uprising, the famine served as the reason.
In the same year 1071 (although historians, including Rybakov, argue about this date), a sorcerer appears in Novgorod. In the Laurentian Chronicle so - " Such a sorcerer also appeared under Gleb in Novgorod; he spoke to people, pretending to be a god, and deceived many, almost the whole city, he said, “I foresee everything,” and, blaspheming the Christian faith, he assured that “I will cross the Volkhov in front of all the people.” And there was confusion in the city, and everyone believed him and wanted to destroy the bishop. The bishop, however, took the cross in his hands and put on a vestment, stood up and said: “Whoever wants to believe the sorcerer, let him follow him, whoever believes in God, let him go to the cross.” And the people were divided in two: Prince Gleb and his retinue went and stood near the bishop, and the people all went to the sorcerer. And a great turmoil began between them. Gleb took the ax under his cloak, went up to the sorcerer and asked: “Do you know what will happen tomorrow and what will happen until the evening today?” He replied: "I know everything." And Gleb said: “Do you know what will happen to you today?” “I will do great miracles,” he said. Gleb, taking out an ax, cut the sorcerer, and he fell dead, and the people dispersed. So he perished in body, but surrendered his soul to the devil.»
A wonderful story about Prince Gleba and the sorcerer is apparently still a legend, a myth, although who knows. After all, everything is very logical. Another thing is that it is not clear why the boron cheese caught fire. Did Christians oppress pagans? Well no. Coexisted peacefully. Were pagan beliefs strong? Maybe, but that in and of itself is no reason to rebel. As for hunger, it is also unclear, some scientists write about hunger, others do not. Noteworthy is the version of the rebellion for political reasons. Prince Gleb and the bishop (secular power) are imposed by force from Kyiv. Freedom-loving Novgorodians do not like this, plus the events of 991 are fresh. A spark appeared in the face of the sorcerer, and it blazed. And the Novgorodians drove Gleb, as they later did repeatedly with various other princes.
The prince, the leader, has been a sacred figure in Russia since pagan times. It was believed that the luck and well-being of those over whom he sits depend on what kind of prince, what he does and how he lives, whether he really acts. The prince could easily be guilty of drought and crop failure, and the people could easily “not want” such an incorrect prince. Apparently something similar happened to Gleb. As a result, he was still expelled by the Novgorodians. So it must be admitted that in the Novgorod uprising of 1071 the religious reason was not the main one.
I do not presume to judge exactly, but apparently the Magi appear for the last time in 1227 and again in the events associated with the Troubles. Troubles again in Novgorod in 1227 - 1230. and is again associated with hunger, in particular I.Ya. writes about this. Froyanov (see materials). A little later, the Tatar-Mongol invasion began and it was not up to the Magi. But this is for optional reading.
Results.
Like any other “scrapping”, the adoption of Christianity gave its hearts in the form of an armed confrontation. But to say that Christians flooded all of Russia with blood would be stupid. Yes, there were clashes, yes there was violence, but there was also a long peaceful coexistence of Christians and pagans. In general, the adoption of Christianity took place peacefully. A full-scale religious war was avoided, I think that this happened largely due to a strong central government.
The elite - princes, boyars, retinue, merchants, rich city dwellers, first of all adopted Christianity. The adoption of Christianity by a mass of ordinary people was a matter of time and a change of generations. There was no way back, and there couldn't be. Russia gradually became Christian, first of all peacefully, thanks to the efforts of the church and the authorities, and only secondarily by force.
Novgorod, and some other cities, proved to be a struggle for the pagan faith at the very first stage of Christianization. Subsequent riots, for example in 1071, although they had some religious overtones, nevertheless, were due to other reasons.
The question of "what would happen if ...", in the sense that Russia could remain pagan, I personally consider untenable. The whole course of historical development tells us one thing, paganism as the dominant religion ceased to exist, regardless of what forms it took, at what stage of development it was and in what countries.
How developed was paganism in Russia as a religion, at what stage was it? Here the opinions of scientists differ. Some speak of extremely primitiveness, others of developed cults that can compete in pomp with Christian ceremonies. We don't know for sure, information is extremely scarce. But one thing can be said, without paganism, Russia would not have what we call Russian Orthodoxy, it was paganism, smoothly and organically entering Christianity, that gave the Russian people a unique national faith.
This is all the more interesting because one can imagine a continuous chain of inheritance of the previous religion of the one that is replacing it. After all, Slavic paganism was not born from scratch, and before it, the Slavic proto-people had their own primitive cults. According to scientists, such as Rybakov, the cult of women in childbirth is a rethought cult of coastlines, which Slavic paganism inherited from their distant ancestors, and the meander-carpet pattern, so often found in Slavic and Old Russian embroidery, was invented by mammoth hunters for their magical rituals.
But everything flows and everything develops and collapses. Russian Christianity with its "everyday Orthodoxy" received a crushing blow after the 1917 revolution. When the Soviet government began to zealously eradicate and destroy not only Orthodoxy as such, but everything that was connected with it in a vast peasant country, all sorts of "prejudices", "obscurantism", "delusions". All knowledge about “everyday Orthodoxy” was receding into the past, the connection of times was lost. Conspiracies, slander, beliefs and peasant magic receded into the past in a place with grandmothers and destroyed churches. Faith in brownies and goblin, faith in sorcerers and grandmother healers was receding into the past. A whole huge layer of peasant (Christian) culture was receding into the past. The connection between generations was broken. The Soviet, now already, people were called by their faith in communism and a bright future, in which there was no place for "remnants of the tsarist regime."
Materials.
Karamzin M.N., "History of the Russian State", Volume I. A good illustration of how scientific papers are written. Lots of historical references. Volume I is accompanied by another volume containing lists of materials, explanations, additions.Solovyov S.M., "History of Russia since ancient times", Volume I.
Rybakov B.A., "Paganism of the ancient Slavs."
Rybakov B.A., "Paganism of ancient Russia".
Kuzmin A. G., "The Fall of Perun - The Formation of Christianity in Russia."
Vasiliev M. A., "Paganism of the Eastern Slavs on the eve of the baptism of Russia" Research on the origin of the gods Khors and Semargl. The fact that these gods are of Iranian (Sarmatian-Alanian) origin. Considers the issues of the "first religious reform".
Froyanov I.Ya., "The mystery of the baptism of Russia (Ancient history of Russia)"
Froyanov I.Ya., "On the events of 1227-1230 in Novgorod"
Mavrodin V., "People's uprisings in Ancient Russia XI-XIII centuries."In particular," On the uprising in the Suzdal land "
Tikhomirov M.N., "Ancient Russia". Chapter IX. Uprisings of smerds in Suzdal and townspeople in Novgorod in 1071.
Gordienko N.S., "Baptism of Russia". Facts against myths and legends. Polemic notes. A very entertaining book published in Soviet times. The author looks at the topic through a magnifying glass of Marxist-Leninist theory and positions of scientific materialism. This allows him to "expose" all sorts of "fables of the priests" and all that. But, nevertheless, it remains within the framework of recognized academic history. And if we abstract from all the quotes of Marx, Engels, Lenin, then the book turned out to be quite interesting. Like many other authors of the era of socialism, he proves the complete independence of the Russian Orthodox Church from Byzantium, Rome, and from anyone else.
Duluman E.K., Glushak A.S., "Introduction of Christianity in Russia. Legends, events, facts" The same as the previous author. The same thoughts, the same rhetoric, the same revelations. But, as in the previous book, it is very cautious (after all, the book is from the category of anti-religious) about the positive aspects of the adoption of Christianity.
Fedotov G.P., "Russian religiosity, part 1 Christianity of Kievan Rus" Since I have given above two books from the category of Soviet anti-religious. Then let the materials include a book written from pro-Christian positions. The book of a very intelligent, literate man, philosopher. Written without any religious hysteria. The most real historical and philosophical work.
Sarbuchev M, "Baptism of Russia - a blessing or a curse" I specially cite this book separately, I single it out. It is useful to look at it in order to understand that such "literature" also happens. The author, quite in the spirit of the time, denounces everyone and everything. Scandalously reveals. He was not pleased with the historians of tsarist Russia and the historians of the USSR. He denounces and exposes both the priests, and the KGB, and medieval chroniclers, if they wrote something that does not suit him .. The book is written in a rather scandalous journalistic manner. In my opinion, the author tried to meet the needs of the public and tried to pick up a berry from the currently booming field of "branching pseudo-Slavic and pseudo-pagan cranberries."
Lists of other literature can be found in books by serious authors.
Thanks to everyone who made it here.
Myths about the Baptism of Russia
Hundreds of books and thousands of articles have been written about the Baptism of Russia. In addition to purely scientific, among them are many popular, journalistic, journalistic ones. It is in this environment that a great many myths were born and develop. They were created by ideologists of all sorts, idle dreamers, and with them direct opponents of Christianity. In modern mass media, they have become widespread. The editors of Thomas invited Sergei Viktorovich Alekseev, Doctor of Historical Sciences, the author of a biographical book about the Baptist of Russia, Prince Vladimir the Holy, to comment on the content of the most common legends of this kind.
Not a single early source written within a century and a half after the events speaks of forced baptism. On the contrary, contemporaries were amazed at the absence of open resistance - which would be very strange if "in fact" it was massive.
“Fire and Sword” are known to us exclusively from one text - the chronicle of Joakimov cited by the historian of the 18th (!) Century V.N. Tatishchev. Judging by the language and content, this is a very late monument; he reached us only in Tatishchev's Russian History.
Firstly, the Joachim Chronicle itself emphasizes that the matter concerned only Novgorod - “people reproach the Novgorodians”, that they alone were baptized with “fire and sword”. Secondly, the Joachim Chronicle is not only a late source, but also of very dubious origin. Some scientists believe that this is the creation of Tatishchev himself, others that the “chronicle” was created without his knowledge in order to satisfy his scientific interest, and then edited by him. Maybe some ancient text was used in it, maybe not. Archaeologists find confirmation of a fire in the city at the end of the 10th century, but what it is connected with and how accurately the “chronicle” conveys events remains unknown. The “diabolical” proverb that “Putyata baptized the Novgorodians with a sword, and Dobrynya with fire” is the only and rather shaky evidence that some kind of conflict occurred in Novgorod at the time of baptism. The conflict is so localized that for centuries it remained the subject of only oral tradition. Where baptism was really opposed, as in Rostov or Murom, Vladimir put it off until better times, and did not send combatants to storm the recalcitrant cities.
It should also be remembered that Christianity by 988 was no longer a stranger to Russia. There were quite a few Christians in the princely retinue, among the merchants. Christian missions operated in Russia, there were temples. Several princes from the end of the 8th to the 10th centuries were baptized. The change of faith by Vladimir was sufficiently prepared and did not come as a shock to his subjects. The inhabitants of Russian cities could not but think about religious issues, could not remain blind adherents of paganism when it lost the support of the authorities.
Myth 1: Russia was baptized by force, "with fire and sword"
The idea of the forced Baptism of Russia developed in the historical science of the Soviet era, passed from it into popular literature - and thus turned into a "common place". This is one of those cases when such "common places" arise, if not from scratch, then with a minimum of grounds. Russia of the tenth century was only becoming a single state. It is a society for the general arming of the people, autonomous tribes and tribal unions. Vladimir simply did not have the apparatus of suppression necessary for baptism by force. This is not the twentieth century - and not even, for example, Saxony of the early Middle Ages, where scattered tribal duchies dealt with the far superior power of the Frankish Empire. But the prince was the highest spiritual authority for the pagan Slavs. It was this authority of princely power that worked - the public shaming of pagan idols and the threat of becoming an “enemy” to the prince who chose a new faith was enough for the people of Kiev and residents of most other cities of Russia. Another question is how conscious and sincere such an appeal was.
Myth 2: Russia was baptized by the Western, not the Eastern Church
About the baptism of Russia from Byzantium, from the "Greeks", not only Russian sources unambiguously and in detail report - all unanimously - but also contemporaries of the events. This is the Arab Christian historian Yahya of Antioch, and - which is especially important - the German chronicler Titmar. Of course, this does not mean that the West did not preach in Russia or that in some periods this preaching was not even more active than that of the Byzantines. Princess Olga, the first among the Rurikids to be baptized - in Constantinople! - after the cooling of relations with Byzantium, she applied for a bishop to the German king Otto. However, this bishop did not stay in Russia. Later, under Yaropolk and Vladimir, missionaries, probably Italian, worked in Kyiv. However, they did not succeed, which was reflected in the chronicle story about the "choice of faiths." Acceptance of baptism from the Eastern Church allowed the Russians to listen to the word of faith in the temple in the Slavic language - an important circumstance at a time when the Latin clergy exterminated Slavic literacy in Czech Republic, which had submitted to the West.
Myth 3: During the Baptism of Russia, high pagan culture perished, pre-Christian writing disappeared
There is no need to belittle or romanticize the culture of pagan Russia. It was neither "higher" nor "lower" than the pre-Christian culture of the Germans, the Celts, or the Balts - however, our civilized contemporaries would hardly consider any of them high, looking at her closely. It is always better to indulge in romantic dreams at a distance ... Now, when geometers and hydraulics, philosophers and satirists are engaged in history, many “wonderful discoveries” have been made in the field of ancient cultures - but this is a separate and very sad topic. Science knows enough about the culture and life of the ancient Slavs, and all those interested can be referred to the works of archaeologists.
As for writing, there is some bewilderment in the disputes to the point of hoarseness around “pre-Cyrillic writing”. Those who perceive writing as “a matter of national pride” and believe that it “should have been” simply do not understand why this truly characteristic sign of civilization appears. And it appears for one of two reasons. Or with the emergence of bureaucracy and monetary relations, when people stop taking each other's word, and the rulers want to perpetuate their deeds, or under cultural influence from outside. For example, with the advent of religious teachings, for which the written word, Scripture, is sacred. In Hinduism, for example, the spoken word is sacred - and even with writing, sacred texts were not written down until very late. But our writers of the "Vedic religion of the Slavs" for some reason believe that it should be "more written" than the Indo-Aryan.
In reality, the Slavs, like many peoples, had a pictorial "proto-letter", "features and cuts" - symbolic, calendar and counting signs. They did not “die”, but successfully survived in the folk peasant culture until the New Age, when they were used on counting tags, when creating carved calendars, sometimes instead of signatures. A number of scientists cite evidence in favor of the fact that the Eastern Slavs had non-Cyrillic writing since the 9th century, reminiscent of Germanic runes. However, all the few testimonies about these "Russian letters" connect their appearance with Christian preaching - the "letters" appeared in the Crimea, among the "Romian Rus" Christians who lived here for a long time. The few unreadable "rune-like" inscriptions found by archaeologists all date back to the 10th-11th centuries. Whether they are written in the same "Russian scripts", whether it is one system or several local ones, is unknown. A significant part of scientists generally doubts that we are talking about some kind of special writing, seeing in these - I repeat - really single monuments cryptography or magic signs. The topic is interesting, but it seems to have nothing to do with the "death of pagan culture". No culture can perish so completely that modern science fails to detect the slightest trace of it. And the real culture of pagan Russia did not die, in many respects it remained unchanged for a long time - and was inherited, processed, included in itself by Christian Russia.
Myth 4: Although Russia was baptized, paganism continued to dominate
As I have already said, even the townspeople who were baptized in 988-989 hardly realized how strong the new faith is called upon to rebuild the whole life of Russia, the whole way of life. This idea was all the more alien to the vast rural masses, which constituted the majority of the population. So paganism really lived on for centuries, and dozens of works have been preserved in which clerics scourge "two-believers". There were also direct confrontations. Not at the moment, but many years after the Baptism of Russia by Vladimir, the pagan sorcerers raised unrest in different areas. On the other hand, back in the 11th century, they felt at ease at some princely courts. Only at the beginning of the 12th century Christianity was finally established in Rostov, and in the land of the Vyatichi on the Oka, at the same time, the Monk Kuksha, who preached there, perished at the hands of the pagans. In the village they continued to bury the dead in mounds, to celebrate pagan holidays. In some places, temples with idols still stood, and sacrifices were made to them. Even in the cities, Christian culture and education did not always and not always make their way in everything at once. The final victory of Christianity took place in the XIII-XIV centuries, when the Christian faith became the consolidating and uplifting beginning of the people in their opposition to the Horde oppression.
Myth 5: Prince Vladimir, who baptized Russia, was a great libertine
Christianity teaches that it is possible to repent of sins and forgive them by the grace of God. Not everyone knows this, probably, but the medieval creators of the chronicles and lives of Vladimir knew. Apparently, it was difficult for them to imagine that the prince's womanly love in his pagan life, with which he struggled after the acceptance of Christ, which he tried to atone for by repentance and mercy to his neighbors, would become an argument against his holiness for someone. Christians believe that it is not the sinless who are saints, but those who have conquered sin. And not only Russian chroniclers write about how Vladimir overcame himself thanks to the new faith, and the former took place - but the spiritual change of the prince is not a pious fiction.
Myth 6: When Russia was baptized, its ruler stopped executing robbers, fearing sin. From this, criminality flourished throughout the country.
When Russia was baptized, its ruler stopped executing robbers, fearing sin. From this, criminality flourished throughout the country. Is it true?
Vladimir studied Christianity along with his people. He reacted vividly to the lines of Scripture read to him, and often did not immediately understand what his real duty was. The Holy Scriptures say: "Thou shalt not kill." The Kyiv ruler decided to completely abandon executions, and in response to the question of the clergy why he did this, he said: “I’m afraid of sin!” But the “blooming of criminality” was clearly short-lived - very soon the Christian bishops explained to the prince why he was given power, that “it’s not in vain that he carries a sword” and that “it’s worth it for him to execute a robber, but with a test”, i.e., investigating the case . And Vladimir coped with the robberies.
Myth 7: The baptism of Russia forever quarreled with the nomadic peoples
It is difficult to understand where this conclusion comes from. The relations of Russia with the nomads in general did not depend much on the religious choice. For centuries, the eastern branch of the Slavs interacted with the nomadic world in a difficult way - either giving in, then advancing, then rallying against some enemies, then fighting off raids. From the time of the Huns' invasion of Europe in the 4th century until the beginning of the formation of Russia, the Eastern Slavs often found themselves dependent on more cohesive and aggressive nomadic powers. This "symbiosis" could be both forced and voluntary. He left certain traces in the history and culture of the Slavic peoples. In the 9th century, the state of Rus appeared, and the Slavic tribes subordinate to it fought for their unity and independence with the strongest state of the European steppes - the Khazar Khaganate. Of the other nomadic neighbors of Russia, some were developing their own state, while others retained a tribal way of life. Russia either entered into alliances with them, or defended its borders from their encroachments. In the 9th-10th centuries, they fought more than once with the Azov "black" Bulgarians. Around 895, the Hungarians broke through the territory of Russia to the west with battles. Around the same time, the Pechenegs, who drove the Hungarians away, appeared at the borders of Russia. It is known that, alas, Christian Byzantium has led them to the Russian borders more than once in their political interests. The largest of these raids occurred in 968, when the Pechenegs surrounded Kyiv, and the pagan prince Svyatoslav had to leave his conquests in distant lands in order to return home and drive them away. However, after that, Russia concluded an alliance with the Pechenegs - and in 969-971 they fought with the Bulgarians and Byzantines on the side of Svyatoslav. And in 972, on the Dnieper rapids, they killed the prince, who was returning to Kyiv.
Vladimir had to repel the Pecheneg raids immediately after the seizure of power, even in pagan times. It was the longest war of his entire reign. The adoption of Christianity, on the contrary, brought a respite here - in 1008, through the mediation of the German Christian missionary Bruno of Querfurt, peace was concluded with part of the Pechenegs. It operated until 1013, when the Pechenegs were brought to Russia by a Christian ruler who was in alliance with them - the Polish king Boleslav ... But with the tribes of Guz or Torkov, both Svyatoslav and Vladimir supported only an alliance - they lived further from the borders of Russia and had with her common enemies.
So baptism did not fundamentally affect relations with nomads. The pagan Turkic tribes of the Pechenegs and Torks, known as the "black hoods", went over to the service of Russia in the 12th century and served mostly faithfully. The Polovtsy, who had settled by that time on the Russian borders, either fought, then reconciled, then mixed with the Russians - and religion here did not interfere much. The Polovtsians quite easily (how sincerely it is another matter) accepted Christianity, and by 1223 two of the strongest khans of the European Steppe were Christians. All dynastic marriages known to us between Russia and the Steppe (both Polovtsian and Horde) took place in the Christian era. The fact that in the Mongol Empire and in the Golden Horde Christianity (though not Orthodox, but Nestorian) could become the state religion is a well-known fact. So, the conflicts of Russia with nomadic peoples are by no means due to religious reasons, although if the preaching of Christianity from Russia was more successful, this would contribute to their much greater rapprochement.
As you can see, there is no data on the violent nature of baptism and any conflicts. The authorities, as in Kyiv, are calling for "not accepting" the overthrown and disgraced idol - and this call has been heard. The potter from Pidba (a village near Novgorod) shames the fallen god, which, of course, meets with the full approval of the chronicler. In such a picture, we note, there is nothing unreliable - the "aristocratic" state cult of Perun was imposed on the Novgorod region from Kyiv as the main one only a few years before. This was discussed earlier in the annals. Note that even then there is no mention of any unrest and conflicts (“and the people of Novgorod will eat him like God”).
In the next in time after the Primary Chronicle - PVL of the beginning of the 12th century, as already mentioned, there is no talk of the baptism of Novgorod at all. It is noteworthy that there are also no data from the above article 6497, which could not not present in the original story about the baptism of Russia - information about the establishment of a hierarchy headed by a metropolitan. This is another argument in favor of the fact that the story from N1Lm belongs to the creator of the Primary Chronicle. In PVL, for the reasons indicated earlier, the entire chronicle article was released.
A number of news from the Novgorod chroniclers proper about the baptism of Novgorod is opened, in all likelihood, by an article from the Sophia First Chronicle of the senior version (S1Ls). The use by the compiler of this all-Russian code (at present it is convincingly dated to 1418) of earlier Novgorod sources does not cause much doubt. In one of the two lists of S1Ls and in all later versions of the code there is the name "Sofia Timepiece", clearly associated with Novgorod Sophia. Hence, by the way, the name of the chronicle, which has become generally accepted. Its source, obviously, along with others, was the collection of the Novgorod sovereign annals of the XII - XIV centuries.
In this eparchial Novgorod chronicle (the Sofiyskiy vremennik), of course, there was also a story about baptism, somewhat different from H1Lm. We present it further:
In the summer of 6497, Vladimer was baptized and took from Photius the Patriarch of the Tsar of the city, the single Metropolitan of Kyiv, Leon, Archbishop Akym Korsunanin of Novgorod, and in other cities, bishops and priests and deacons, who baptized the whole Russian land; and be joy everywhere. And archbishop Akim came to Novgorod, and ruined the tremies, and slaughtered Perun, and commanded the lure to the Volkhov; and turned already, attracting and feces, beating with a rod and shoving. And at that time the devil entered Perun: “Oh, woe! Oh me! I got it to these unmerciful hands." And vrinusha him in Volkhov. He swims through the great bridge, (and lays down his club and says: “Novogorod children commemorate me for seven years”). She is now insane, killing the joy of creating a demon. And the commandment is not to pass it on to anyone anywhere. And the piddler went early to the river, although the mountaineers should be led to the city; ol Perun swam to the bervi, and I will reject and shistom: “you, speech, Perushitsa, you drank and yal to satiety, and now swim away”; and a flash of window light .
There are two significant inserts in this text compared to the previous story. Firstly, a well-known but unreliable legend about the baptism of Vladimir under Patriarch Photius (who lived in the 9th century and was involved in the first baptism of Russia) was introduced. In connection with Photius, the first metropolitan Leon is named, previously known mainly from metropolitan lists. The second insert relates to the topic we are considering. The chronicler introduced a folklore story known to him (quite popular among Novgorodians) about the curse of Perun, because of which veche battles began on the bridge over the Volkhov. This myth (established, as we see, already in the era of fragmentation) adds nothing to the picture of baptism - although, undoubtedly, it testifies to the fear of yesterday's pagans before their prostrate deity.
With the light hand of the creators of the all-Russian annalistic code ("Sophia-Novgorod") of 1418, it was this edition of the story that got into the vast majority of later Russian chronicles, including Novgorod - Novgorod II, Novgorod III, etc. The changes made to the text, turned out to be insignificant. The addition of the All-Russian Abridged Chronicle Code of 1495 turned out to be the most significant. After the story about the baptism of the people of Kiev by Vladimir, it is added here: “ and Dobrynya was sent to Novgorod» . The 1512 chronograph adds why Dobrynya was sent: “ and there commanded to baptize all» . It can be assumed that until the end of the XV - beginning of the XVI century. legends about the baptism of Novgorodians by Dobrynya survived. Although, on the other hand, it should be noted that this could also be the conjecture of the Moscow chroniclers, who knew that Dobrynya ruled Novgorod under Vladimir. Their conclusion (if this is precisely the conclusion, and not evidence of tradition), we emphasize, looks quite reliable in our opinion. Already quite obvious conjectures are the later messages of the Nikon Chronicle, which ascribes to Dobrynya, who allegedly accompanied the Metropolitan himself, the baptism of almost the entire north of Russia.
Only one text, a fragment of the Joachim Chronicle, stands out against the background of numerous revisions of the S1Ls narrative, with the mention of which we began this article. A little lower we will return to the problem of dating and authenticity of this monument. Here we emphasize that in the form that has come down to us, the chronicle, which has come down only as part of the "History" by V. N. Tatishchev, was compiled no earlier than the last quarter of the 17th century. Needless to say, the source of the text could not have belonged to the first Bishop of Novgorod, Joachim, for retelling whose narrative the unknown chronicler gave out his work. Suffice it to say that the baptism of Russia was associated in it with the name of the Bulgarian Tsar Simeon, who died several decades before the reign of Vladimir. The Joachim Chronicle reports the following about the baptism of the Novgorodians:
In Novegrad, people, having seen the hedgehog Dobrynya, go to baptize me, make a veche and swear to not let everyone into the city and not let the idols be refuted. And when they came, they, having swept away the great bridge, had come out with weapons, and after Dobrynya, weighed them down with scorn and gracious words, either way they didn’t hear at least and hung out 2 great crossbows with a lot of stones, putting them on the bridge, as if they were their own enemies. We are standing in a trading country, walking through the markets and streets, learning people, how much we can. But we perish in wickedness the word of the cross, like an apostle of rivers, appearing as madness and deceit. And so we stayed for two days, baptizing several hundreds. Then the thousands of Novgorod Ugony, driving everywhere, yelled: "It's better for us to die, rather than our gods give to reproach." The people of this country, razsviripev, ruined the house of Dobrynin, plundered the estate, robbed his wife and some of his relatives. Tysetsky Vladimirov Putyata, like a sensible and brave husband, having prepared a lodia, having chosen a husband from Rostov 300, having transported over the city to his country and entering the city, I’ll harm anyone, all the teas of his wars of being. He reached the court of Ugonyaev, onago and other previous husbands yat and abie sent to Dobrynya across the river. The people of the country, having heard this, gathered up to 5000, stumbled Putyata, and slashed evil between them. Some who walked past the Transfiguration of the Lord razmetash and rake the houses of Christians. Even in the development of Dobrynya with all the sluts with him, (and commanded some houses to be set on fire near the shore, which made people more afraid of the former, I ran to put out the fire; and abie) ceased to cut, then the previous men asked for peace.
Dobrynya, having gathered howls, forbid robbery and crush idols aby, burning wood, and breaking stones into the river; and for the wicked the sorrow is great. Husbands and wives, who saw that, with a great cry and tears, shed for me, as if for their gods. Dobrynya, mocking, is weighty to them: “What, madness, you regret those who cannot defend themselves, what help you can expect from them.” And she sent everywhere, announcing that they should go to baptism. Sparrow is a posadnik, the son of Stoyanov, who was brought up under Vladimir and was very sweet-tongued, this idea on a solemn and more than all weight. Idosha mnozi, and not those who want to be baptized, the warriors of the Vlachakha and the Kreschakha, the men are above the bridge, and the wives are below the bridge. Then many people who have not been baptized will tell about myself to be baptized; For this reason, I commanded all baptized wooden crosses, ovo coppers and privateers to lay on the neck, and those who do not have it, do not believe and baptize; and abie the smashed-out church with a paki construction. And baptizing tacos, Putyata go to Kyiv. This is why the people revile the Novgorodians: Baptize Putyata with a sword, and Dobrynya with fire.
We have given the text according to the draft manuscript, in which Tatishchev copied the chronicle monument he inherited. The words we put in brackets were probably omitted by negligence and filled in on the margin - without them, there is an obvious gap in the text. After the word "marque" in the manuscript there is a note by Tatishchev, who proposes to translate it as "tin".
To the Joachim Chronicle in general and to this, its most famous evidence in particular, there is a directly opposite attitude in science. Some researchers see in Ioakimovskaya a completely adequate source and, sometimes without any reservations, write about the “revolt” of the Novgorodians against baptism. On the other hand, some source experts expressed strong doubts about the authenticity of the source in general, suggesting that it be fully or partially the work of V. N. Tatishchev himself. Most researchers, however, recognized the authenticity of the surviving text of Ioakimovskaya, identifying it as a Novgorod monument of the late 17th century. Sharing this approach, the author of these lines came to the conclusion about the use in the Joachim Chronicle, along with oral traditions, of the legend about the baptism of Russia, created in Novgorod around the third quarter of the 13th century. Information about the history of Kievan Rus is gleaned from it. It was this legend that the author of the late 17th century most likely mistook for the chronicle of Joachim. Perhaps this was facilitated by the retained in the later processing of the first person "we" when describing the baptism of the Novgorodians.
Nevertheless, the very fact of Tatishchev's intervention in the text he saved is evident. His assumptions and conjectures, although not too numerous, he boldly introduced into the annalistic narrative. This can be verified by comparing the draft of the "History", that is, a direct copy of the chronicle text, with the white Vorontsov manuscript. The fragment in question, having been rewritten cleanly, has undergone the following changes. Not quite, apparently, appropriate, in his opinion, in this context, Tatishchev replaced the “crossbows” with the Old Russian word “vices”, and in Dobrynya’s speech addressed to the Novgorodians, “help” for some reason became “benefit”. Novgorod "men" are now asking for peace, "having come to Dobrynya." The most mysterious addition is a whole phrase after the description of the “vices”: “The highest above the priests of the Slavs, Bogomil, was named Nightingale for the sake of sweetness, lords forbidding the people to submit.” This is clearly an alien insertion into the text, where Ugoniy is brought out as the leader of the uprising, and it is he who is being taken hostage by Putyata. One can guess that Tatishchev considered it appropriate to put a priest at the head of the rebels. But where he got his name from (more precisely, two names), we cannot even guess. In any case, this problem has more to do with the history of the historical science of the 18th century, which in many respects still stood between the annals and the novel, than with the history of the baptism of Russia.
So, the intervention of V. N. Tatishchev in the text is relatively small. But the recognition of this fact does not make the Chronicle of Joachim unconditionally reliable. Even N. M. Karamzin believed that the whole history of the baptism of Novgorodians was just an extended conjecture around a proverb of vague origin. Even recognizing the presence of genuine legends in the basis of Joachim's, which were also recorded for the first time back in the 13th century, we cannot deny the contradictions and inconsistencies of the existing text. There are also clearly unreliable details in it. We encounter outright absurdity already at the very beginning: how could the Novgorodians put their "crossbows" "on the bridge", which they themselves had just "smashed"? Or did they build it again - towards Dobrynya? By the way, it was under this bridge - safe and sound, that, as we remember, Perun sailed in S1Ls. The very presence of two stone throwers in Novgorod, by the way, raises some doubts. Although the Slavs had known siege equipment since the end of the 6th century, they built it, as a rule, during campaigns at the site of the siege, and did not store it in peacetime in cities. Before that, nothing was known about the defensive use of stone throwers in Russia, especially in the north of Russia.
The use of 300 Rostovites as a support in the baptism of Novgorod looks very strange. In Rostov and its district, the new faith was established with difficulty and already in the 11th - early 12th centuries. The presence in Novgorod of 5000 combat-ready citizens at the end of the 10th century. can also be questioned. There is no written or archaeological evidence of the existence in Novgorod before the baptism of the Church of the Transfiguration of the Lord, although the fact cannot be ruled out. According to all sources, there was only one idol in the main Novgorod temple - the wooden Perun. This is confirmed by excavations at the site of the temple (Peryn). It also speaks of a large number of idols, including stone ones. Neither the thousand Ugonyay nor the posadnik Sparrow Stoyanovich are mentioned in other sources. At the same time, the "posadnik" in the X - XI centuries. titled the princely governor in Novgorod, and sometimes the prince of Novgorod. It is quite obvious that the posadnik at the time described was Dobrynya, and not a certain Sparrow. As for Putyata, its existence can only be judged on the basis of the proverb given at the end of the passage. At the same time, we must not forget that Putyatoy was the name of one of the representatives of the Novgorod-born boyar Ostromirovich dynasty in the 11th century, and it was from here that the name could get into folklore (including legends and epics about Dobrynya).
However, some finds of the Novgorod archaeological expedition in the layers of the end of the 10th c. compared with the news of Pseudo-Joachim about the baptism by "fire". We can assume that the author of the XIII and then the end of the XVII century. relied on a genuine historical tradition, which was based on real facts. But, all the more recognizing some power of the document for Joakimovskaya, we must trust her testimony as a whole. And it is clear enough. Let us recall what exactly is said in the Joachim Chronicle about the origin of the proverb: “for people vilify Novgorodians: Baptize putyata with a sword, and Dobrynya with fire. Who could "reproach" the Novgorodians, if all of Russia was forcibly baptized, "with fire and sword"? - obviously no one. It seems that the Joachim Chronicle is the decisive evidence against such assertions. Novgorod, where some clashes took place, clearly became an exception to the general rule, which led to the appearance in anti-Novgorod circles (possibly in Kyiv) of a “diabolical” proverb.
We cannot judge the specific circumstances of the appearance of the text of the Novgorod primary source of the Joachim Chronicle in the 13th century. But one of his tendencies is clear - to emphasize some, in the biblical language, the "cruelty" of his fellow citizens, to stick out their opposition to the Christianization of not only their city, but Russia as a whole. Therefore, the Novgorod princes Oleg and Vladimir are opposed to the Kyiv Askold and Yaropolk as militant pagans. Therefore, some unrest that accompanied the baptism in Novgorod and was not noticed by either Kyiv or the official local chronicle, turns into a formidable uprising, which almost cost the first Christians their lives. The “diabolical” sentence, composed by the ill-wishers of Novgorod, crowned this peculiar pamphlet against fellow citizens, written clearly in defiance of the concept of baptism established in the sovereign annals. When in the XIX and especially in the XX century. the time has come for new reassessments, the text of the ancient polemicist has again been in demand. However, it was given the exact opposite meaning. Pseudo-Joachim showed his city as a sad exception - some modern historians tried to turn his interpretation of events into a typical example for all of Russia.
Fire and sword? The myth of neo-pagans about the bloody baptism of Russia
One of the most common propaganda myths of neo-pagans is that the baptism of Russia was accompanied by a genocide of unprecedented proportions. Here, for example, is a quote from a film popular with pagans: "Over 12 years of Christianization, only in the Kyiv region (Kievan Rus), out of 12 million, 9 were physically destroyed."
This is how, according to the pagans, the baptism of Russia took place. These figures - 9 million killed - wander from one neo-pagan publication to another. Such a version, of course, is not for those who will ask: where does the data come from? What historical sources is this based on? What to do with the fact that at that time such a huge number of people could not possibly live "in the Kyiv region alone"?
The ideologists of neo-paganism know that their target audience will not ask such boring questions and trustfully swallow any fiction, and the more delusional the fiction, the more trusting.
Okay, swallowed. But let's see what follows from this and how this could be done in practice. How many soldiers did Vladimir have? Personal squad - about 400 people. If you mobilize everyone you can, that is, connect the militia, then the maximum, the ceiling is 40,000. And this, as we understand it, is just yesterday’s baptized pagan Slavs, many of whom have relatives and friends in the same Kyiv region. Were they also baptized by force? Did 400 Christians force 40,000 pagan Slavic warriors to be baptized? And they did not rebel, not only at baptism, but also when they were sent to exterminate their relatives? Okay, let's say these 40,000 Slavic warriors were so obedient to the prince that all orders were obeyed unquestioningly. But what about those destroyed 9 million pagans? Indeed, at that time there were no weapons of mass destruction, only swords, spears and arrows, each person had to be killed "manually". At the same time, it is known that in ancient Russia every adult man had a weapon, and it is unlikely that he would sit idly by if the prince's soldiers came to kill his family.
Imagine the picture: 40,000 Christians armed with swords and bows kill 9,000,000 pagans in just a few years, of which at least 1,800,000 were healthy men who had the same swords and bows at home. What kind of vegetables do you have to be in order to allow yourself and your families to be exterminated with more than 40-fold superiority? That is, according to the neo-pagans, our ancestors were like that? This is how their “native faith” made them?
There are three simple questions here.
1. Christians say that our ancestors voluntarily accepted the new faith, as free people, trusting in the choice of the prince, who coordinated this choice with the elders. The neo-pagans say that our ancestors did not want to be baptized, but a handful of Christians, by order of the prince, forced them by force, and at the same time simply exterminated three-quarters, despite the colossal superiority of our ancestors in numbers. Tell, which of these versions humiliates the memory of our ancestors? Which one represents them as weak-willed, downtrodden weaklings, and which one - free people?
2. If the Christians were able in such a short time to defeat the forces of the pagans so many times superior, then, it means that Christianity makes a person just a super-warrior. How does this fit in with the assurances of the pagans that Christianity is the religion of weaklings, and that paganism supposedly will make us stronger?
3. And finally, the most interesting question: a where did the Slavic gods look at that time? Perun, Rod, Svarog, Dazhdbog and other comrades - they why didn't they intervene? Indeed, according to neo-pagans, during the baptism of Russia, a catastrophe of incredible proportions occurred: the people, who for centuries regularly honored these gods and made sacrifices to them, are suddenly exterminated by three-quarters, and the remaining quarter are forcibly converted to another faith. When would these Slavic gods intervene and help, if not now? After all, we are talking about all their fans! And even more than just fans. Neo-pagans claim that for the Slavic gods they are not slaves, but children. That is, imagine: in front of your eyes, three-quarters of your children are killed, and a quarter are forced to disown you. Would you interfere? Wouldn't you do everything possible to stop this, protect your children? And why didn’t the Slavic gods intervene, didn’t help? What did they do when their murdered children called out to them? Where were they?
I remind you: we believed the myths of neo-pagans about the bloody baptism of Russia and see what comes of it. Possible options:
a) the Slavic gods wanted to help, but the Christian God turned out to be stronger, and they could not do anything;
b) the Slavic gods were strong and could help, but they didn’t give a damn about their children and fans, and they didn’t even want to lift a finger to save them;
c) Slavic gods simply do not exist, therefore, naturally, there was no one to help our ancestors.
Whichever option we choose, it remains unclear why we now return to these gods? Based on neo-pagan stories, it turns out that the Christian God cares more about His slaves than the Slavic gods about their children.
But okay, let's say they don't care about their fans/children. But after all, Christians destroyed the temples of these gods, stopped the sacrifices they made, overthrew their idols. This already, whatever one may say, affects the Slavic gods themselves. They were not only deprived of fans, but also humiliated to the maximum. And why didn't these gods intervene even then?
In The Tale of Bygone Years there is a story about how the idol of Perun was overthrown in Kyiv. When he was thrown into the Dnieper, several pagans ran along the shore for a long time and shouted “Get out, God, get out!” Such was the last prayer to Perun on Russian soil. His last supporters did not ask him to protect them from Christians - they asked Perun to protect himself, to show a miracle and pull his fallen idol out of the water in front of everyone. Indeed, it would be effective. Perhaps the Christianization of Russia would have stopped. But nothing happened. Even more than that: when the waves finally nailed the idol to the shore, the peasant who was there, approaching, pushed him back into the river with the words: “You, Perunishche, ate and drank to your heart’s content, and now swim away.” Not only against the princely Christian warriors, but also against one unarmed peasant, Perun was powerless.
And after all, these are the very Slavic gods that today's neo-pagans like to draw in the form of mighty knights in armor, about whom they say that they are, they say, not like Christ, Who taught to turn the other cheek and did not resist when He was crucified, these gods teach, that you need to stand up for yourself and give back. How did it happen that all this pack of superpowerful Slavic gods got in full from the followers of the One Who taught to turn the other cheek, and could not help themselves or their supporters in any way?
So, one more time. If the neo-pagans tell the truth about the bloody baptism of Russia, then we have only three options for how to explain the inaction of the Slavic gods: either they simply do not exist, or they are nothing before the Christian God, or they don’t give a damn about their followers and once they have already thrown our ancestors very harshly. It is rather strange after this to agitate for a return to the veneration of such gods.
Hatred for the holy Equal-to-the-Apostles Prince Vladimir blinds the neo-pagans so much that they attribute to him sins that he physically could not fulfill (the extermination of 9,000,000 people). Meanwhile, just a few decades before the baptism of Russia, one of the Slavic tribes killed Prince Igor just because he wanted to increase the tax. Through sent assassins, the princes were killed even after Vladimir. And we are offered to believe that these same people so easily allowed themselves to be baptized by force, and, moreover, accompanying this with the extermination of three-quarters of the population? Yes, Vladimir would have been killed at the preparation stage, unless he could convince people to voluntarily follow his choice.
neo-pagans just they cannot admit that Vladimir, who himself “had been ill” with paganism, saw that this was a dead end path for Russia. He already saw then what is now obvious to us when we look at what happened to the peoples who remained in their traditional paganism. The peoples of the Far North, the tribes of the Amazon, the natives of Australia, the inhabitants of "black" Africa - no written language, no culture, no full-fledged statehood, no civilization. Prince Vladimir did not want such a future for the Russians. Therefore, he realized that anything other than paganism had to be considered when choosing a faith. And notice how wisely he chose. First I studied it myself. Then he sent ambassadors to study the faiths. Then he consulted with the elders: when the ambassadors returned, “the prince called his boyars and elders, and Vladimir said:“ Here come the men sent by us, let’s listen to everything that happened with them. ” And only when the opinion of both himself and the ambassadors and elders coincided, he was baptized himself and called on the inhabitants of Kyiv to follow his example. Many followed, and those who did not follow were allowed to remain in their former faith, and preaching among them continued in the following decades, even after the death of Vladimir.
The neo-pagans need the myth of the “forced baptism of Russia” like air, because if it turns out that this was a voluntary choice of the people, then the absurdity of their pathos of “returning to the faith of their ancestors” becomes too obvious. But here's the problem: archeology does not confirm the forced baptism of Russia, although it is impossible to hide the millions of those killed. In England, a burial with several dozen headless Vikings was recently discovered; in Rome, thousands of skeletons of murdered babies were found in the ancient layers, which, according to pagan law, were abandoned by their parents and put to death - such finds are constantly found here and there. If there was a forced baptism of Russia with the genocide of dissenters, our land would be overflowing with such evidence. But no matter how much they dug up ancient Russian cities, no such finds were found, although in Soviet times this would have come in handy for the fight against the Church.
In addition to archeology, written sources are silent about the forced baptism of Russia. Although at that time there were no attitudes towards tolerance, and Christian chroniclers had no need to hide the victory of the Christian army over the opposing pagans - if such a place took place. There is one piece of evidence cited by the 18th-century historian V.N. Tatishchev, referring to a certain “Joachim Chronicle”, that the voivode, allegedly sent from Kyiv to Novgorod, met the unwillingness of part of the Novgorodians to be baptized and an obvious rebellion against princely power. And after the Novgorodians burned his wife and children alive, this governor, angry, defeated them and forced them to be baptized by force.
There are two things to be understood here. Firstly, a number of scholars consider this entire fragment to be a fake, as well as the story about the “Joachim Chronicle”, which no one, including Tatishchev, has seen, and those who recognize it as authentic believe that the text was compiled no earlier than the 17th century. Secondly, even if we believe the testimony of this "Joachim Chronicle", in fact it testifies AGAINST the myth of the forced baptism of Russia. Because this “annalistic” fragment ends with the words: “That is why people reproach the Novgorodians: he baptized Putyata with a sword, and Dobrynya with fire.” How could the residents of other ancient Russian cities reproach them with this proverb if all of Russia was baptized by force? This fragment and this proverb testify precisely to the fact that, on the whole, the baptism of Russia took place peacefully and voluntarily, and the example of Novgorod is an exception. Neo-pagans and atheists, who, on the contrary, cite this story as an allegedly characteristic example of what was happening then everywhere in Russia, thereby deliberately distort the text, endowing this evidence with a directly opposite meaning than the one that is embedded in it.
But there is more convincing evidence against the version of the resistance of our ancestors to Christianity, for whom paganism was supposedly so dear that only the threat of life forced them to be baptized. This could have been said 60 years ago, when science had only three texts from pre-Mongolian Russia, and all of them were compiled in official circles, which can be easily accused of bias. But in the second half of the 20th century, birch bark writings of Ancient Russia were discovered. Most of them were found in Novgorod, but also in many other cities. Of the more than a thousand letters, 450 were written in pre-Mongol times - starting from the first half of the 11th century (that is, during the lifetime of eyewitnesses to the baptism of Russia) and ending with the first half of the 13th century. These charters, unlike chronicles, were written by the most ordinary people, these are their daily notes, household and personal correspondence, etc. All these notes, which no censorship could check and which for the most part were not supposed to be kept for a long time, reflect the real mentality and life of our distant ancestors. They are posted in the public domain, anyone can go to the site and read them.
And here's what's interesting: among the letters there are many texts on Christian church topics. But there's nothing pagan at all. Although this is the usual correspondence of ordinary people. No one writes: “Today they dumped the idol of Svetovit, what a pity” - or: “Let Perun and Veles help you” - or, conversely, “punish you”, etc. It is these letters, found by Soviet atheist archaeologists, that irrefutably prove the voluntary adoption of Christianity in Russia. Of course, some old habits, such as rituals associated with burial, did not go away right away, but actually our ancestors threw out the “old gods” irrevocably and did not even remember them. There are several conspiracies among the birch bark letters, but even they appeal entirely to Christian realities.
Back in 866, the Greek Patriarch Photius sent a bishop to the Rus, who baptized Prince Askold and part of the people - at least part of the squad. It is known that in the first half of the 10th century there was a church of the prophet Elijah in Kyiv, which is mentioned in the Greek-Russian treaty of 944. In 957, on her own initiative, Princess Olga was baptized, after which she contributed to the spread of Christianity in Russia: new churches and priests appeared in the cities. Although the mission of the German Bishop Adalbert invited by her was unsuccessful and Adalbert fled, the church built under him in Kyiv remained. Other archaeological finds also testify to the spread of Christianity in Russia to Vladimir, in particular, from the middle of the 10th century, pectoral crosses are found in the burials of the nobility.
Russia accepted Christianity so easily precisely because it was a voluntary choice of people who had already become well acquainted with him for 120 years and associated with Olga's authority. During a council hosted by Vladimir on the issue of choosing a faith, the boyars said: “If the Greek law was bad, then your grandmother Olga would not have accepted baptism, but she was the wisest of all people.”
So the myth of the forced baptism of Russia is not only untenable historically, but also humiliates the memory of our ancestors, presenting them as a silent herd of sheep, allowing them to do whatever they want with themselves.
Vedic Information Agency Midgard-INFO
The number of Europe before Christianization is 800 million people, after baptism - 4 million people ...
Ros (Rus) - in the period from 988 to 1000, when there was a forced baptism out of 12 million people, 3 million remained.
In Russia, Christianity was planted by force, while the religious buildings of the Slavs were destroyed, often along with resisting people. Note that Christianity was an urban religion, for rural residents in general, this creed was both incomprehensible and unprofitable, since it did not help them in any way, unlike the natural cults of the Faith. But even in the cities of Russia, the introduction of Christianity as the only religion, accompanied by the destruction and desecration of native shrines, caused stubborn resistance. The key point is that they did not rebel against Christianity as such (several centuries before that, a few Christians coexisted relatively peacefully with the pagans), they rebelled against the destruction of the old faith.
Few modern Orthodox theologians mention the presence of conflicting explanations for the beginning of the "baptism of Russia", and preachers generally bypass this delicate topic. Most often, the Korsun version is presented, and they present it to their listeners and readers as the only and absolutely reliable one. Meanwhile, such a prominent and authoritative church historian as Professor E. E. Golubinsky resolutely rejected it (see: vol. I, part I, p. 127).
Archeology provides interesting information about how the Christianization of Russia proceeded: out of 83 ancient settlements of Kievan Rus of the 9th - early 11th centuries studied by archaeologists. 24 (almost 30%) “ceased to exist by the beginning of the 11th century. Apparently, we are talking primarily about those settlements of the ancient Slavs, which were originally sanctuaries. Archaeologists discovered a system of nests of settlements that accumulated around the "fortifications", which did not carry either the so-called "cultural layer", evidence of permanent residence of people on them, or any serious fortifications. But on these strange settlements, traces of constantly maintained fire and the remains of "pillars" were often found, towering in the center of a circle outlined by a symbolic rampart - that is, traces of pagan temples.
It was such large well-known pagan centers of worship that were destroyed in the first place, and people from the settlements either died defending their shrines, or preferred to go farther away, to where they would not be reached by Christian missionaries who planted a new faith "with fire and sword." The cruel actions of the prince, his desire to destroy the pagan gods and the Magi is also explained by the mentality of the people of that time. The prince had to destroy all the statues of the old gods, all their servants, as they destroy deadly enemies. Being brought up in a pagan society, Vladimir could not help but believe in the power of the gods, could not help but be afraid of their revenge. Even the Christian chroniclers did not doubt the power of the Magi: “It is not a wonder that sorcery comes true from sorcery,” Nestor writes, and Jacob Mnikh echoes him in praise of Prince Vladimir - “the Magi did a lot of miracles.”
By the way, in the Novgorod region, a legend has been preserved that the baptist of Novgorod, Dobrynya, subsequently drowned himself in Ilmen from remorse of conscience. At least, in the annals after 990, he really is no longer mentioned. Chronicles keep a deaf silence about the death of Prince Vladimir, only fixing the fact itself. But it is interesting that on old icons, starting with frescoes of the 12th century. in the cathedrals of Vladimir, the prince-baptist is depicted with a very characteristic cross in his hands - an attribute of a martyr. This is how Christians who were martyred for their faith were portrayed. After the death of Vladimir, the baptism of Russia continued by the same methods, although much more slowly. In Murom and Rostov, resistance to the planting of Christianity, according to traditional church history, continued until the 12th century. Longer than other Slavic tribes, the Vyatichi retained their native faith, resisting Christian missionaries until the 13th century. At the same time, until the 12th century, anti-Christian uprisings broke out every now and then in the already baptized lands. (See the article "Anti-Christian speeches of the pre-Mongolian period").
Not only scientists, but also some church authors did not deny in the past the forced nature of the baptism of residents of the capital of the Kievan state. Many historians of the church pointed out the violence of joining the new faith of the people of Kiev in their writings. So, for example, Archbishop Macarius (Bulgakov) wrote: “Not everyone who then accepted the holy faith with us accepted it out of love, some only out of fear of the one who commanded; not all were baptized willingly, some reluctantly” (vol. I, p. 27). “Those who did not want to be baptized,” E. E. Golubinsky admitted, “there were a lot both in Kyiv and in general in all of Russia” (vol. I, part I, p. 175). Archbishop Philaret (Gumilevsky) is of the same opinion on this matter (see: History of the Russian Church, p. 31),
The violent nature of the initiation of the inhabitants of Kyiv to Christianity was also openly recognized on the pages of pre-revolutionary church periodicals - in articles devoted to Prince Vladimir and his activities for the “baptism of Russia”. In particular, the priest M. Morev wrote, commenting on the chronicler's story about the baptism of the people of Kiev: “Many did not want to be baptized: some out of indecision, in which Prince Vladimir himself had been for a long time, others out of stubbornness; but the latter did not want to listen to sermons either... Fierce adherents of the old faith fled to the steppes and forests” (Prikhodskaya Zhizn, 1911, No. 12, p. 719). Archimandrite Macarius retold the chronicle narrative in the same spirit. Stating that many residents of Kyiv “appeared on the river out of fear of the prince,” he further noted: “A lot of Kyivans were baptized at the same time. But there were also those who did not want to listen to either the sermons of the clergy or the orders of the prince: they fled from Kyiv to the steppes and forests ”(Pravoslavny Blagovestnik, 1914, No. 2, pp. 35 - 36).
It couldn't be otherwise. As already noted, the need for a new religion was initially felt only by the social elites of Kievan Rus. Vladimir and his inner circle needed it to strengthen the grand ducal power. The emerging class of feudal lords sought in it a justification for their privileged position in ancient Russian society and an ideological bridle for servants and serfs. For merchants, the Christianization of Russia promised the expansion and strengthening of trade ties with Christian countries. All of them received the opportunity, with the help of the new faith, to instill a spirit of humility in the masses, to reconcile the oppressed with the hardships of servitude, and thereby keep the masses from active forms of social protest. For the sake of such prospects, it was possible to change the centuries-old tradition, break with the pagan past, abandon the usual forms of spiritual life.
As has been repeatedly noted, the baptism of the people of Kiev was only the beginning of the process of Christianization of the Old Russian state. The new faith, which became the state religion, had to be spread throughout the cities and villages of Kievan Rus. And although baptism was everywhere carried out not only by the clergy brought from Byzantium, but also by the princely authorities, it turned out to be not so easy to complete the task.
Judging by chronicle evidence and hagiographic materials, it is rare where the planting of Christianity did without violence and coercion on the one hand and resistance on the other. Here are just a few facts.
Novgorod was the second largest and most important city of Kievan Rus during the reign of Vladimir Svyatoslavich. Therefore, after the people of Kiev, the people of Novgorod had to be baptized. For this purpose, Bishop Joachim Korsunyanin was sent to Novgorod in 991, accompanied by the Novgorod voivode Dobrynya (Vladimir's maternal uncle) - the same one who, ten years earlier, set an idol over Volkhov at the command of the Kyiv prince. To help them, the Kyiv squad was given, headed by the thousandth 1 Prince Vladimir Putyata.
1 Tysyatsky - an official who was elected by the veche; during the hostilities, he commanded the people's militia ("thousand").
Having learned about the purpose of the arrival of Dobrynya with the bishop, the Novgorodians decided at the veche not to let these missionaries into the city and not to accept the new religion. Realizing that the Kyiv warriors did not arrive with Dobrynya for a walk, the inhabitants of Novgorod took up arms. Their actions were directed by the thousand Ugony and the pagan priest Bogomil Nightingale. The center of resistance was the Sofia storm. So that the baptists would not move to it from the Trade side, where they forcibly led several hundred Novgorodians to the new faith, a bridge across the Volkhov was swept away. Putyata, with the help of military cunning, penetrated with his detachment into the center of the Sofia side and captured Ugoniy himself and his associates. But the rebellious Novgorodians continued to resist. Only after the Dobrynya detachment, which had secretly crossed the river, set fire to the houses of the participants in the uprising, was the resistance of opponents of the Christianization of the Novgorod land suppressed.
Of course, the rebellious Novgorodians were guided in their actions not only by religious motives, but also by political considerations - their unwillingness to become completely dependent on the Kyiv prince. It is the latter circumstance that explains the participation in the uprising of many representatives of the Novgorod nobility. Nevertheless, the rejection of the new faith was evident, and this rejection was most sharply and openly demonstrated by the simple Novgorod people, to whom the implanted Christianity did not bring anything good.
When, on the orders of Dobrynya, the pagan idols were defeated (the wooden ones were put on fire, and the stone ones were drowned in the Volkhov) and the procedure for adopting the Christian faith began, there were not so many who wanted to be baptized. The warriors, the princely retinue, had to move from persuasion to direct coercion and drive the stubborn Novgorodians into the river by force.
This whole procedure for the forced conversion of Novgorod to Christianity gave the Novgorodians reason to declare that they were "baptized by Putyata with a sword, and Dobrynya with fire."
Many dramatic situations that testified to the non-acceptance of Christianity by a significant part of the townspeople to the villagers of Ancient Russia and the forcible conversion of disobedients to the new faith developed in other places.
In particular, it was with great difficulty that Christian missionaries managed to introduce the new faith to the inhabitants
ancient Rostov. The first two bishops Fedor and Hilarion (XI century) could not do anything with the pagan Rostovites and themselves abandoned their stay in this city: "escaping, not tolerating disbelief and much annoyance from people." The city rebelled against the third bishop, Leontius: a real threat hung over the "lord" not only of exile, but also of violent death. Only the fourth bishop Isaiah was able to achieve some success, and even then not in Rostov itself, but in Rostov land. But he also failed to force all Rostovites to abandon paganism and finally convert to Christianity.
The same difficulties arose during the Christianization of the population of ancient Murom: neither Gleb, the son of Prince Vladimir of Kyiv, nor his successor, were able to accustom the people of Murom to the new faith.
Sometimes the local population arranged lynching of some missionaries who showed excessive zeal in planting Christianity. This is exactly what the Vyatichi, for example, did when they killed the monk-missionary Kuksha, who arrived in the Vyatka land from the Kiev-Pechersk monastery in the middle of the 12th century.
No information has been preserved about the circumstances of the introduction to Christianity of the inhabitants of other cities and localities of Ancient Russia. But it is unlikely that baptism took place there differently than in the cities mentioned above.
All this, taken together, gave grounds to historians (including church historians) to say that the introduction of Christianity in Russia under Prince Vladimir and his successors was not a peaceful and calm process, that the new faith was planted with the use of violence, causing opposition from various groups the local population and, above all, the common people. Russia, wrote E. E. Golubinsky, “was baptized not only by preaching, but also by coercion” (vol. I, part I, p. 199). Arguing with those who claimed that our ancestors were baptized "without struggle and violence", E. E. Golubinsky wrote: an impossible invention of our immoderate patriots who want to sacrifice common sense to their patriotism. There is no doubt that the introduction of the new faith was accompanied by considerable unrest among the people, that there were open resistances and riots” (ibid., pp. 175-176).
Just as categorical in their statements on this topic are the authors of many articles published in pre-revolutionary times on the pages of church periodicals. “Paganism,” the article “The Political and Social Activities of the Highest Representatives of the Russian Church (X-XV centuries)” said, “was still strong, it had not yet outlived its time in Russia, it resisted the introduction of Christianity; therefore, the government takes violent measures in the spread of Christianity, resorting to fire and sword in order to introduce the gospel teaching into the hearts of the pagans. And the ministers of Christ do not arm themselves against such means; on the contrary, they justify them and erect the cross of Christ on the corpses” (Zvonar, 1907, No. 8, p. 32).
All these facts and statements, which unflatteringly characterize the secular and ecclesiastical "baptizers" of Kievan Rus, are well known to the theological and ecclesiastical circles of the Moscow Patriarchate. Nevertheless, modern theologians and preachers either hush them up or make statements of the exact opposite content - they assure their readers and listeners that no one opposed the introduction of Christianity and that this action was carried out in an atmosphere of universal support. “The attraction of pagans and non-believers in Kievan Rus to the Church of Christ,” says Metropolitan Anthony (Melnikov), without arguing his assertion in any way, “was carried out not by violence, but by the power of persuasion, with the assistance of the grace of God, living and miraculous” (ZHMP, 1982, No. 5, p. 50).
Vladimir understood that the newly built churches needed ministers. And if the people of Byzantine bishops met with obvious hostility, then what can we say about priests who would have to communicate with forcibly converted pagans personally and daily. Yes, and there would not have been so many in Byzantium who wanted to go to serve in the churches of the newly baptized Rus. The prince gathers children from all over the world (mostly orphans) to teach book, first of all, of course, biblical wisdom. Byzantine books are translated into Russian, of course, not completely, in an abbreviated, often simplified version.
Indicative in this regard is the coverage of the circumstances of the baptism of Novgorodians by the modern church press. In the preface to the "Orthodox Church Calendar for 1983", dedicated to the church history of Novgorod and Pskov, the introduction of Christianity to Novgorod is presented as a peaceful idyll: "The inhabitants of Novgorod were baptized in 988 (?) from St. Joachim of Korsunyanin ... who became the first Novgorod bishop" (p. 2). And not a word about how this baptism took place and what was the reaction of Novgorodians to the appearance of Joachim in the city.
Statements of this kind are intended for people who do not know anything about the past of their people - including the fact that our ancestors were baptized forcibly and did this in the interests of the ruling classes of the emerging feudal society.
Fragment from the book by N.S. Gordienko
"Baptism of Russia: facts against legends and myths", 1986
In 1988, the Russian Orthodox Church, functioning in a socialist society along with other religious associations, will celebrate its own millennium. It considers the date of its origin to be the time when the inhabitants of ancient Kyiv were converted to Christianity. It is believed that this event, called the "baptism of Russia", took place in 988 and it took place by order of the Grand Duke of Kyiv Vladimir Svyatoslavich (? -1015).
The phrase "baptism of Russia", familiar and familiar to everyone who has studied the history of our Fatherland, is not just unsuccessful or inaccurate, but deeply erroneous and misleading. This expression, as it were, suggests the presence in the past of a one-time event: the rapid and widespread initiation to Christianity of the whole people, the whole country - Ancient Russia. Meanwhile, domestic history does not know such an event. There was a long process, stretching for several centuries, of introducing Christianity as the state religion of the centralized Kievan state. The official beginning of this process, which was gradually prepared by all the previous development of ancient Russian society, was laid by Prince Vladimir, who in 988 baptized only the inhabitants of his capital, and in subsequent years, the population of a number of other cities of Kievan Rus.
Calling the initiation to Christianity only the people of Kiev "baptism of Russia", Orthodox theologians and church historians committed a gross violation of elementary logic, known as substitution of concepts. They impermissibly identified one of the initial moments of the long process of Christianization of Ancient Russia with the whole process, gave it the appearance of a one-time and completely completed event, and the year 988 began to count the time of the establishment of Christianity in ancient Russian society and to celebrate as an exactly fixed date of the “baptism of Russia”.
From theologians, this phrase (with all its ambiguity) was borrowed by noble-bourgeois historiography, making it commonly used. True, historians themselves usually used the expression "baptism of Russia" in several meanings. They denoted by this term at least three completely different, albeit interconnected, phenomena:
- first, specific events- the conversion to Christianity of the people of Kiev, carried out in 867 year by Prince Askold (“the first baptism of Russia”), and in 988 the year of Prince Vladimir (“the second baptism of Russia”);
- Secondly, chain homogeneous events - the actions of princes Vladimir and Yaroslav to plant Christianity within the centralized Kievan Rus: the baptism of Novgorodians, as well as residents of other ancient Russian cities, located mainly on the waterway from Kyiv to Novgorod;
- third, processes- the establishment of Christianity as the state religion of the ancient Russian state, as well as the introduction to Christianity of the population of princely Russia and tsarist-imperial Russia.
However differences between these phenomena were not fixed (especially in the popular publications of pre-revolutionary authors), and therefore a false theological and church interpretation of the phrase "baptism of Russia" was fixed in the minds of the bulk of the population of old Russia. The Christianization of the Old Russian society was perceived as having a specific date (987 or 988) a one-time act that quickly and radically changed all aspects of the life of the population of the Kyiv state, created everything from nothing and unambiguously predetermined all the subsequent development of the country, providing it with the status of "Holy Russia".
By tradition, Soviet historians also began to use the phrase "baptism of Russia", referring it not so much to the baptism of the people of Kiev, but to the planting of Christianity in Russia and in Russia as a state religion. But even such concretization did not overcome the ambiguity of this expression. Yes, it is impossible to overcome it, due to the fundamental fallacy of the phrase. In a traditionally ambiguous meaning, it entered the Soviet popular science, educational and fiction, in our journalism.
Basically, without accepting the phrase "Baptism of Russia" and joining those who deem it necessary at all withdraw it from scientific circulation and everyday life, we still cannot completely refuse to use it in this book, since we have to argue with those who made this phrase familiar to themselves, and therefore only resorted to it or are resorting to it. However, in the author's text, the expression "baptism of Russia" is used in only one sense: to refer to everything planting and approval process Christianity as the dominant ideology of the class ancient Russian society and the state religion of the Kievan state. In other words, we consider it as the equivalent of the phrase "Christianization of Russia".
Since the introduction of Christianity in Ancient Russia was not a one-time event, strictly localized in time, but was lengthy process, then it cannot be dated to a specific year. Just as it is impossible to date the formation and establishment of feudalism or capitalism in Russia by a certain year, there are also no grounds for establishing a fixed date for the Christianization of the Old Russian society, which could be considered as the date of the “baptism of Russia”. Hence, there can be no talk of some kind of anniversary baptism or Christianization of Russia, including, of course, its millennium.
There is only one more or less reliable date - the already mentioned year of the mass conversion of Kyivans to Christianity (988). This event marked the beginning of the official adoption of Christianity by the feudal elite of Ancient Russia as the state religion and at the same time laid the foundations of the Russian Orthodox Church - one of the offshoots of universal Orthodoxy. So Moscow Patriarchy considers the millennial anniversary of this event as her anniversary, for which she began to prepare ahead of time. But in the course of such preparation, she, acting in the spirit of the theological and ecclesiastical tradition, began to present your own church anniversary, as the anniversary of the "baptism of Russia", which was already reflected in the initial organizational actions of the official authorities of the Russian Orthodox Church.
In December 1980, by a special decision of the church leadership, a jubilee commission was created to prepare and conduct the celebration of the millennium ... no, not the Russian Orthodox Church, as it should have been supposed, but the “baptism of Russia” (?!) ... Starting from 1981, the upcoming anniversary, invariably characterized as the millennium of the "baptism of Russia", they began to devote editorial articles that open the desktop church calendars, which are published annually by the Moscow Patriarchate (only in the calendar for 1983 it is said that in 988 there was no "baptism of Russia", but only "Baptism of the people of Kiev", which "laid the foundation for the establishment of Christianity throughout the Russian land"). Since 1982, commemorative materials have appeared on the pages of the Journal of the Moscow Patriarchate and other periodicals of the Russian Orthodox Church.
So what? - some atheist readers may think or say, having read the above information. – You never know what anniversaries the Moscow Patriarchate has celebrated, is celebrating and intends to celebrate in the future. For example, in 1948 she celebrated the 500th anniversary of the Russian Orthodox Church gaining independence from Byzantium (autocephaly, or self-heading), in 1967 - the 50th anniversary of the restoration of the patriarchate, annulled by order of Peter I at the beginning of the 17th century, and in 1988 it will be 400 years old since the establishment of the patriarchate in Russia. For believers of the Orthodox confession, all these are holidays, anniversaries, anniversaries, and, moreover, significant, epochal ones. But for you, people who do not believe and do not belong to the number of members of the Russian Orthodox Church, what is the reason to follow purely church anniversaries, and even more so to dedicate books to them?
Indeed, if Moscow Patriarchy considered the millennium of the baptism of the people of Kiev at the command of Prince Vladimir, as the anniversary of this particular event and as the anniversary of the Russian Orthodox Church, since she had already announced the year 988 as the beginning of her existence, then there would be no need to pay special attention to it and talk about it on the pages of atheistic publications. But the fact of the matter is that the authors of theological works and church preachers strive to present this anniversary to the Soviet people as a fundamental event not only for modern Russian Orthodoxy, but for the entire socialist society. Conversion to Christianity The inhabitants of ancient Kyiv are characterized by them as "the baptism of Russia" and are declared the beginning of all beginnings. The theological and ecclesiastical circles of the Moscow Patriarchate deduce from it not only the assertion of Christianity as the state religion of Ancient Russia with all the ensuing consequences, but also Russian statehood itself, Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusian culture, the national character of the Slavic peoples of our country, as well as all those social and moral values, which are the pride of socialist society.
Baptism of Kiev, arbitrarily issued for "Baptism of Russia", is proclaimed by the modern church press "the greatest event in the history of the Russian people" (50th anniversary of the restoration of the patriarchate. Special issue of the Journal of the Moscow Patriarchate - further ZhMP, - 1971, p. 25). “It was a great event,” they said about the baptism of the inhabitants of Kyiv at the first meeting of the synodal jubilee commission. - Therefore, in the year when we intend to prayerfully celebrate the millennium of the baptism of Russia, together with all the people we will be able to celebrate the millennium of our patriotic culture and literature... "(ZHMP. 1982, No. 1, p. 6).
The ideologists of modern Russian Orthodoxy have taken advantage of the purely church jubilee for religious and apologetic purposes, far beyond the scope of the jubilee being celebrated. In reports, articles and sermons dedicated to the millennium of the action of Prince Vladimir of Kyiv and the conversion of the inhabitants of the capital of the Old Russian state to a new faith, a distorted, religious-idealistic coverage of the historical past of our country and the place of Russian Orthodoxy in it is given. Their authors exaggerate the role of the religious factor in the historical process, idealize Russian Orthodoxy of the pre-revolutionary period, embellish the nature of its influence on the destinies of the country and the life of the people, biasedly illuminate the anti-people activities of the episcopate and clergy at turning points in Russian history, uncritically characterize the reactionary church leaders of the past, known for their rejection of the progressive tendencies of social development.
Moreover, talking about baptism of Kiev and about the millennial anniversary of this event is used by modern Orthodox theologians and church leaders of the Moscow Patriarchate to "throw a bridge" from the past to the present. They are trying, in particular, to assure the Soviet people of the absolute progressiveness and enduring significance of the Christianization of Ancient Russia, prove the direct involvement of Russian Orthodoxy in the social, scientific, technical and cultural development in our country, in the establishment of high principles and noble ideals in a socialist society, to justify the presence of a confident and stable historical perspective in the Russian Orthodox Church. In other words, preparation for millennium of the baptism of Kiev and the formation of the Russian Orthodox Church is used by the theological and ecclesiastical circles of the Moscow Patriarchate as an additional reason for the widespread activation of religious propaganda, designed to mitigate the crisis of religion in the modern world, increase the prestige of Orthodoxy in the eyes of Soviet people and strengthen the position of the Russian Orthodox Church in a socialist society.
At present, there is a situation where there is not only a purely religious apology for the initial moment of the “baptism of Russia”, carried out by the ideologists of the Russian Orthodox Church. This event in national history became the object of political provocations and ideological speculations on the part of the extremely reactionary forces of the Russian and Ukrainian church emigration, standing on openly anti-communist positions and for more than six decades engaged in subversive anti-Soviet activities. The greatest activity of this kind is shown by the leaders of the émigré religious-political group, pretentiously calling itself the "Russian Church Abroad" . Its leadership decided to use both the upcoming anniversary of the baptism of the people of Kiev and the formation of the Russian Orthodox Church, as well as preparations for it (immigrant clerics call it the "anniversary of the baptism of Russia") to strengthen anti-communist sentiments and anti-Soviet activity in the Russian emigre environment, as well as to intensify ideological sabotage against our country.
In the second half of 1977, with the sanction of the leadership of the "Russian Church Abroad" and under its direct tutelage, a "Commission for the preparation of the celebration of the millennium of the baptism of Russia" was created, composed of anti-Soviet people of all stripes and ranks and headed by the former confessor of the traitor general Vlasov, and now the rector of one from the New York churches of the "Russian Church Abroad" archpriest A. Kiselyov. At the initiative of this commission, first in the United States of America, and then in other countries of the Western world, the so-called "congresses of the Orthodox-Russian public" began to be held, discussing similar problems: "Modern Russian reality and the ideals of Holy Russia" ("Modernity and Eternal Values" ), “Russian Diaspora on the Threshold of the Anniversary”, etc.
Speaking at the first of these "congresses", held in September 1977 in New York, Archpriest A. Kiselev stated the clear prevalence of inertia and disunity in the Russian émigré environment, noted the open unwillingness of an increasing number of émigrés to support the anti-communist actions of their church leaders, to demonstrate frank anti-Sovietism. The chairman of the anniversary commission expressed dissatisfaction with this state of affairs, which is very deplorable for the "Russian Church Abroad" and those forces of international political reaction that support it. He bluntly stated that the leaders of the "Russian Church Abroad" expected to use the preparations for the millennium conversion of Kyivans to Christianity in order to overcome this inertia and disunity in the course of it and with its help, and at the same time try to find allies among the believing Soviet people with the help of falsifications, slander and social demagogy.
Information about the activities of the anniversary commission, articles and reports written by its order began to be published on the pages of the official body of the "Russian Church Abroad" - a fortnight "Orthodox Russia" and in other publications of the emigrant religious-political group. But this was not enough for the politicizing emigrant churchmen, and in 1978 the commission began publishing its own quarterly magazine "Russian revival".
The very first issue of the Russian Renaissance contained a crude and provocative fraud: it claimed that the editorial offices of this quarterly were located in Western Europe, North America and ... Russia. True, a clarification was made in the second issue: it is indicated that the co-editors, secretaries of the editorial board and members of the editorial meeting are persons living in the USA, France, Canada and other Western countries. And, nevertheless, on the cover and title page of the magazine there are three cities where this edition is allegedly published: Paris, New York and ... Moscow. In subsequent issues, the publishers publicly declared that the Russkoe Vozrozhdeniye magazine was designed not only for distribution among Russian emigration circles and in the West in general, but also for illegal shipment to the Soviet Union. The same statements were made by them on the pages of other publications of the "Russian Church Abroad" (in particular, in "Orthodox Russia").
The prince became the editor-in-chief of the Russian Renaissance S. Obolensky, who was characterized by the emigrant press as a person who "has proven his anti-communist conviction through many years of publicistic activity." And after the death of the prince in 1980, this post was taken by an equally pronounced anti-communist and anti-Soviet G. Andreev. This is the pseudonym of a traitor to the Motherland G. Khomyakova, who collaborated during the Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945. with fascist intelligence agencies, and then picked up by the American intelligence services, for which he still works tirelessly. The émigré press sees perhaps the main merit of the new editor of Russkoye Vozrozhdeniye in the fact that he proves "the moral justification of an active struggle against the communist regime."
Some idea of whose interests the Russian Renaissance expresses and defends, which has the subtitle "Independent Russian Orthodox National Organ", is given by the list of "Russian church and public organizations" that subsidizes the publication, published from the very first issue. This list mentions not only the Synod of Bishops of the “Russian Church Abroad”, its Western American and San Francisco dioceses, the Orthodox Cause fraternity and the Holy Trinity Monastery in Jordanville, but also military organizations (in particular, the “Great Don Army Abroad” , "Garrison 297 named after General Turchinov", "Cadet Association", "North American Department of the Russian All-Military Union", "Union of Officers of the Russian Expeditionary Force", etc.), as well as monarchical associations: Russian Imperial Union-Order. The Tsar-Martyr Foundation, the Union of Zealots in Memory of Emperor Nicholas II, etc. ...
We also recommend
Hero pioneers in the Great Patriotic War Heroes of the Patriotic War pioneers presentation
Presentation "Formation of posture in preschool children Hygiene of correct posture presentation for children
Sciences of the human body
Presentation "history and prospects for the development of robotics"
The value of the struggle of Russia with the Polovtsy
Asia and Africa after World War II
Loading...